Maybe the hat is precisely why they can't determine an exact height, plus the downward angle of his head. Just guessing...
That downward head angle, peering from under his brow and sidling posture is a mannerism though.
Maybe the hat is precisely why they can't determine an exact height, plus the downward angle of his head. Just guessing...
Yes especially “who may be in the room” which Carter later doubles down on as noted in @TL4S prior post.Gosh, sometimes seems this case is stranger than fiction....
Especially with that last press conference: 'you may be in this room'
It's practically Hollywood
It's bizarre. And frustrating.
Because it's real. And I'd so like to see justice for Abby & Libby
"When we decided that, through the information we received, that we were going to release the second sketch I don’t believe the individual knew we were going to do that. So it was really, really important. I think he was probably there and/or watching, simply because he thought we were on the wrong path," Carter said.
"The sketch isn’t a photograph. A sketch is a sketch and that’s really important for everybody to understand," Carter said. "I believe that the individual when we catch him, it will be a combination of those two.”
It is my understanding that the video released is a zoomed in portion of the video shot while on the bridge. I understand they may not want to release the original because it might contain one of the girls in the video.
I think if they did we have some people with the ability to give us a clearer picture of this guy.
Do you guys think they would every release the original video(just the clip we have seen) with the original resolution?
Someone here suggested members here altering known photographs from the case. I'd strongly suggest against that, actually if i see that i'd report it both on this site and elsewhere. This site is very influential on the internet in general and while people here understand things aren't real or are just tools or whatever the majority of the internet won't follow your guidelines.
Welcome to WS Nadal.Someone here suggested members here altering known photographs from the case. I'd strongly suggest against that, actually if i see that i'd report it both on this site and elsewhere. This site is very influential on the internet in general and while people here understand things aren't real or are just tools or whatever the majority of the internet won't follow your guidelines.
Facebook as well. I've seen people sharing the altered photos all over Facebook and it disturbs me. Doing it on your own is one thing-making those altered images public and passing them around social media instead of the official image and sketch is something else entirely. I strongly disagree with doing that. When the public alters or "enhances" the image, they're bringing their own ideas and biases to it. It might be fun for them but, IMO, we shouldn't be filling in the dots and reconstructing the way we think he looks. There's a HUGE chance we'd be wrong.
A lot of Websleuths members also thinks it's wrong if you refuse a lie detector or call a lawyer. The vast majority of wrongful convictions come from this type of attitude, you should absolutely lawyer up 100% innocent or not and you should NEVER take a lie detector innocent or guilty because they aren't reliable and there's nothing positive you can get from taking one.
Welcome to WS Nadal.
Can you possibly provide the post(s) you are talking about please? I am unaware of any posters doing that. Some analysis was allowed in the private image thread to a certain degree but that has not been open for quite some time now.
Re your first para I am unaware anyone has either stated BG was in or cut out of the SC photo. AFAIK he was not around when that was taken (2.07 p.m.) No photos or video have been altered AFAIK. I don't know the answers to your last 4 questions, but there has been speculation on here and Grey Hughes you tube channel. We have discussed them in some instances.Sorry I can't keep up.
So has it now been confirmed that BG was not in the original SC photo and had not been cut out as previously speculated?
Trying to visualize within the time frame...
Was Libby off the bridge when she took the SC picture as shown on the GH video? Did the girls get back together on or off the bridge before BG got to them? Where would Libby be standing when she started the video on BG? I'm thinking she was back up on the bridge by then because the angle of the video clips were more straight than at an up angle?
If you can reply to posts that you are commenting about, it does help with flow and clarity.Hey, thanks for the welcome.
I'd need to go back and pick out specific posts since these threads move so fast. #422 on this page i think is a result of members convincing each other they can do things within an echo chamber.
If you can reply to posts that you are commenting about, it does help with flow and clarity.
But probably cannot present a prosecutor with an air-tight case. Or, at least one that the prosecution would see as air-tight.Then LE would know exactly who he is.
DbmStop confusing me please.
Could it be both?
Somewhere between the two sketches. So about age 37?